A statute of limitations typically starts running from the point a claim accrues or is discovered, meaning the clock can be tied to when harm actually became known to the injured party.

A statute of repose, by contrast, runs from a fixed triggering event, such as the date a product was sold or a building was completed, regardless of when any resulting harm becomes apparent or discoverable.

Statutes of repose are frequently found in areas involving long-tail risks, such as product liability claims, construction defect claims, and certain types of professional malpractice claims.

These laws are designed to prevent indefinite exposure to liability for manufacturers, builders, and professionals, by establishing a clear point after which claims can no longer be brought, even if a defect or harm only becomes apparent much later.

Because a statute of repose is designed to create a firm, predictable cutoff point, courts generally treat it differently from a statute of limitations, resisting the kinds of equitable tolling doctrines that can pause or extend a limitations period.

This rigidity is intentional: the purpose of a statute of repose is to give potential defendants certainty that their exposure to liability ends at a defined point, rather than remaining open based on when a plaintiff happens to discover harm.

If the repose period passes before a claim could reasonably have been discovered, the underlying right to sue is generally extinguished, which can feel harsh in individual cases where harm surfaces only after the deadline has passed.

Because of this, understanding whether a statute of repose applies, and calculating its triggering date accurately, is an important early step in evaluating whether a potential claim remains viable.